Revista CEFAC
https://revistacefac.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/1982-0216/20242632224
Revista CEFAC
Review Articles

Impact of the pandemic on scientific production in audiology: A scoping review protocol

Impacto da pandemia nas produções científicas em audiologia: um protocolo de revisão de escopo

Georgea Espindola Ribeiro; Elora Bion Pereira; Daniela Polo Camargo da Silva

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216/20242632224 Revista CEFAC, vol.26, n3, e2224, 2024
PDF English
PDF Português
SciELO
Downloads: 0
Views: 103

Abstract

Purpose: to present a scoping review protocol aimed at mapping the main characteristics of systematic reviews published in the field of Audiology, during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to evaluate the methodological quality of the studies found.

Methods: a scoping review guided by the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF.IO/F8N7Y). The databases included PubMed, Lilacs, Scopus and Web of Science. In the first stage, two reviewers will independently evaluate the articles based on their titles and abstracts. The selected articles will be read in full based on the eligibility criteria. Any ambiguity or disagreement will be discussed and decided consensually. The results will be presented in the form of a flowchart and a narrative summary, following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

Final Considerations: this scoping review protocol was developed in accordance with current guidelines and will seek to analyze the literature on systematic reviews in Audiology, during the pandemic, identifying gaps and existing evidence.

Keywords

Systematic Review; Pandemics; Coronavirus; Audiology

Resumo

Objetivo: apresentar um protocolo de revisão de escopo com o intuito de mapear as principais características das revisões sistemáticas publicadas no campo da Audiologia durante o período da pandemia da COVID-19 e avaliar a qualidade metodológica dos estudos encontrados.

Métodos: trata-se de uma revisão de escopo norteada pelas recomendações do Instituto Joanna Briggs e pelo checklist PRISMA-ScR, registrada na Open Science Framework (OSF.IO/F8N7Y). As bases de dados a serem pesquisadas incluem PubMed, Lilacs, Scopus e Web of Science. Na primeira etapa, dois revisores avaliarão independentemente os artigos por títulos e resumos. Os artigos selecionados serão lidos integralmente com base nos critérios de elegibilidade. Qualquer ambiguidade ou desacordo será discutido e decidido consensualmente. Os resultados serão apresentados em forma de fluxograma e um resumo narrativo.

Considerações Finais: este protocolo de revisão de escopo foi elaborado conforme diretrizes atuais e buscará analisar a literatura sobre revisões sistemáticas em Audiologia durante a pandemia, identificando lacunas e evidências existentes.

Palavras-chave

Revisão Sistemática; Pandemias; Coronavirus; Audiologia

References

1. Mackey A, Bassendowski S. The history of evidence-based practice in nursing education and practice. J Prof Nurs. 2017;33(1):51-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.05.009 PMID: 28131148.

2. Buccheri RK, Sharifi C. Critical appraisal tools and reporting guidelines for evidence-based practice. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2017;14(6):463-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12258 PMID: 28898556.

3. Schaffer MA, Sandau KE, Diedrick L. Evidence-based practice models for organizational change: Overview and practical applications. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69(5):1197-209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06122.x PMID: 22882410.

4. Brown DA. Review of the PubMed PICO Tool: Using evidence-based practice in health education. Health Promot Pract. 2020;21(4):496-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919893361 PMID: 31874567.

5. Lehane E, Leahy-Warren P, O'Riordan C, Savage E, Drennan J, O'Tuathaigh C et al. Evidence-based practice education for healthcare professions: An expert view. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2019;24(3):103-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111019 PMID: 30442711.

6. PubMed [Webpage on the internet]. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). [accessed 9 jan 2022]. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

7. Larsen CM, Terkelsen AS, Carlsen AF, Kristensen HK. Methods for teaching evidence-based practice: A scoping review. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):259. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1681-0 PMID: 31296212.

8. Conselho Federal de Fonoaudiologia [Webpage on the internet]. Resolução CFFa nº 320, de 17 de fevereiro de 2006 [accessed jun 2023]. Availabe at: https://www.fonoaudiologia.org.br/resolucoes/resolucoes_html/CFFa_N_320_06.htm

9. Naudé AM, Bornman J. A systematic review of ethics knowledge in audiology (1980-2010). Am J Audiol. 2014;23(2):151-7. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_AJA-13-0057 PMID: 24695796.

10. Dzulkarnain AA, Pandi WMWM, Rahmat S, Zakaria N'. Simulated learning environment (SLE) in audiology education: A systematic review. Int J Audiol. 2015;54(12):881-8. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2015.1055840 PMID: 26197885.

11. Casoojee A, Kanji A, Khoza-Shangase K. Therapeutic approaches to early intervention in audiology: A systematic review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2021;150:110918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2021.110918 PMID: 34500357.

12. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467-73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 PMID: 30178033.

13. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker DSC. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Heal. 2015;13(3):141-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050 PMID: 26134548.

14. Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil H. Chapter Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI, 2020. [accessed jun 2023]. Availabe at: https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL/4687342/Chapter+11%3A+Scoping+reviews

15. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 PMID: 25554246.

16. Bierer BE, White SA, Barnes JM, Gelinas L. Ethical challenges in clinical research during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Bioeth Inq. 2020;17:717-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10045-4 PMID: 33169251.

17. Geerts H, van der Graaf P. A modeling informed quantitative approach to salvage clinical trials interrupted due to COVID-19. Alzheimers Dement (NY). 2020;6(1):e12053. https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12053PMID: 3316361.
 

Submitted date:
06/16/2023

Accepted date:
05/10/2024

66febc87a953951b63726343 cefac Articles
1982-0216 (Electronic) 1516-1846 (Printed)
Revista CEFAC ©2025 All rights reserved.

Revista CEFAC

Share this page
Page Sections